Should Fecal Microbiota Transplants Be Regulated as Drugs or Organ Donations?
The FDA is anticipated to release a finalized guidance document any day now around the regulation of fecal microbiota transplants for the treatment of Clostridium difficile infection. The outcome will dictate how they’re priced, who oversees their use, and who can make money off the treatment.
The FDA is anticipated to release a finalized guidance document any day now around the regulation of fecal microbiota transplants (FMT) for the treatment of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). This guidance could have large implications for the pharmaceutical industry because the FDA will decide to regulate the treatment either as investigational new drugs (INDs), or as a kind of organ donation. The outcome will dictate how they’re priced, who oversees their use, and who can make money off of the treatment.
In July 2013, the FDA
In 2014, the FDA released a draft guidance
For 3 years, the FDA functioned under this enforcement discretion guideline until March 2016 when it released a new draft guidance
Currently, patients treated with FMT use stool banks such as the nonprofit OpenBiome, which performs screening and testing procedures on the FMT product that is then distributed to providers. At present, OpenBiome
Critics of FMT regulation as an IND argue that the approach is based on outdated science and recommend an alternative regulation process. “Our key recommendations are that FDA treat stool for FMT as a tissue rather than a drug/biologic; that stool banks be regulated like tissue banks with requirements for donor testing and screening and compliance with ‘good manufacturing practices’; that FDA establish or fund a registry and stool banks be required to report adverse events and data on outcomes to the stool bank,” said Diane E. Hoffman, JD, MS, the Jacob A. France Professor of Health Law and director of the Law and Health Care Program at the University of Maryland Carey School of Law, said in an
Hoffman also explained that the proposed regulations offered in the 2016 draft guidance document would “likely limit patient access” to the treatment.
Hoffman is not alone in this thinking. Since the publication of the draft guidance, more than 40 well-known gastroenterologists and infectious disease clinicans wrote to the agency, urging it to rethink its approach.
However, supporters of the regulation, largely pharmaceutical companies and providers, argue that regulating FMT as a drug will help to ensure the efficacy and long-term safety of the therapy. Currently, there are no long-term records of adverse events because the FDA has yet to determine regulation guidelines.
Beyond that, experts in bioethics as well as healthcare professionals are calling on the FDA to create a
According to the latest
In a poll
Newsletter
Stay ahead of policy, cost, and value—subscribe to AJMC for expert insights at the intersection of clinical care and health economics.
Related Articles
- Promising Early Efgartigimod Response Data for Generalized Myasthenia Gravis
September 18th 2025
- Iron Dysregulation Linked to MS Progression, Review Finds
September 18th 2025
- Metabolic Issues More Common in Patients With HIV
September 18th 2025
- Barriers to Gender-Affirming Surgery Persist Despite High Satisfaction Rate
September 18th 2025